GeForce GT 325M vs GeForce 9200
GeForce GT 325M
Popular choices:
GeForce 9200
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - GPU
About G3D Mark
G3D Mark is a standard benchmark that measures graphics performance in real-world gaming scenarios. It simplifies comparing cards from different brands, where higher scores directly correlate with better fps and smoother gaming experiences.
Value Upgrade Path
This is the official ChipVERSUS Value Rating, comparing raw performance (G3D Mark) per dollar. Components placed above yours deliver better value for money. The GeForce GT 325M is positioned at rank 274 and the GeForce 9200 is on rank 562, so the GeForce GT 325M offers better cost-efficiency for playing games.
Avg price is the current average price collected from markets across the web.
Performance Per Dollar GeForce GT 325M
Performance Per Dollar GeForce 9200
Performance Comparison
About G3D Mark🏆 Chipversus Verdict
🚀 Performance Leadership
The GeForce GT 325M is the superior choice for raw performance. It leads with a 1.2% higher G3D Mark score and 100% more VRAM (1 GB vs 512 MB). This advantage makes it significantly better for higher resolutions (1440p/4K) and graphic-intensive titles compared to the GeForce 9200.
| Insight | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| Performance | ✅Leading raw performance (+1.2%) | ❌Lower raw frame rates (-1.2%) |
| Longevity | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2013 / Kepler (2012−2018)) | 🛑Obsolete Architecture (2016 / Maxwell (2014−2017)) |
| Ecosystem | Supports FSR Upscaling | Supports FSR Upscaling |
| VRAM | ✅ More VRAM (+100%) | ❌ Less VRAM capacity |
| Efficiency | ⚡ Higher Power Consumption | 💡 Excellent Perf/Watt |
| Case Fit | — | — |
💎 Value Proposition
The GeForce 9200 offers a compelling cost-to-performance ratio. While both GPUs are considered legacy components by modern standards, the GeForce 9200 holds the technical lead. Priced at $15 (vs $20), it costs 25% less, resulting in a 31.8% higher cost efficiency score.
| Insight | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| Cost Efficiency | ❌Lower cost efficiency | ✅Better overall value (+31.8%) |
| Upfront Cost | ⚠️Higher upfront cost ($20) | ✅More affordable ($15) |
Performance Check
Real-world benchmarks and performance projections based on comprehensive hardware analysis and comparative metrics. Values represent expected performance on High/Ultra settings at 1080p, 1440p, and 4K. Modeled using a Ryzen 7 7800X3D reference profile to minimize specific CPU bottlenecks.
Note: Performance behavior can vary per game. Specific architectures may perform better or worse depending on game engine optimizations and API implementation.
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of GeForce GT 325M and GeForce 9200
GeForce GT 325M
The GeForce GT 325M is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in June 25 2013. It features the Kepler architecture. The core clock speed is 980 MHz. It has 384 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 50W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 170 points.
GeForce 9200
The GeForce 9200 is manufactured by NVIDIA. It was released in March 25 2016. It features the Maxwell architecture. The core clock ranges from 965 MHz to 993 MHz. It has 256 shading units. The thermal design power (TDP) is 16W. Manufactured using 28 nm process technology. G3D Mark benchmark score: 168 points.
Graphics Performance
The GeForce GT 325M scores 170 and the GeForce 9200 reaches 168 in the G3D Mark benchmark — just a 1.2% difference, making them near-identical in rasterization performance. The GeForce GT 325M is built on Kepler while the GeForce 9200 uses Maxwell, both on a 28 nm process. Shader units: 384 (GeForce GT 325M) vs 256 (GeForce 9200). Raw compute: 0.7526 TFLOPS (GeForce GT 325M) vs 0.5084 TFLOPS (GeForce 9200).
| Feature | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| G3D Mark Score | 170+1% | 168 |
| Architecture | Kepler | Maxwell |
| Process Node | 28 nm | 28 nm |
| Shading Units | 384+50% | 256 |
| Compute (TFLOPS) | 0.7526 TFLOPS+48% | 0.5084 TFLOPS |
| ROPs | 16+100% | 8 |
| TMUs | 32+33% | 24 |
| L1 Cache | 32 KB | 128 KB+300% |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Advanced Features (DLSS/FSR)
| Feature | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| Upscaling Tech | FSR 1.0 (Software) | FSR 1.0 (Software) |
| Frame Generation | Not Supported | Not Supported |
| Ray Reconstruction | No | No |
| Low Latency | Standard | Standard |
Video Memory (VRAM)
The GeForce GT 325M comes with 1 GB of VRAM, while the GeForce 9200 has 512 MB. The GeForce GT 325M offers 100% more capacity, crucial for higher resolutions and texture-heavy games. Bus width: 128-bit vs 128-bit. L2 Cache: 0.25 MB (GeForce GT 325M) vs 1 MB (GeForce 9200) — the GeForce 9200 has significantly larger on-die cache to reduce VRAM reliance.
| Feature | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| VRAM Capacity | 1 GB+100% | 0.5 GB |
| Memory Type | GDDR5 | GDDR5 |
| Memory Bandwidth | Unknown | Unknown |
| Bus Width | 128-bit | 128-bit |
| L2 Cache | 0.25 MB | 1 MB+300% |
Display & API Support
DirectX support: 11 (10_1) (GeForce GT 325M) vs 10.0 (GeForce 9200). OpenGL: 3.2 vs 3.3. Maximum simultaneous displays: 2 vs 2.
| Feature | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| DirectX | 11 (10_1)+10% | 10.0 |
| OpenGL | 3.2 | 3.3+3% |
| Max Displays | 2 | 2 |
Media & Encoding
Hardware encoder: CUDA (GeForce GT 325M) vs None (GeForce 9200). Decoder: PureVideo VP4 vs PureVideo HD (VP2). Supported codecs: H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 (GeForce GT 325M) vs H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 (GeForce 9200).
| Feature | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| Encoder | CUDA | None |
| Decoder | PureVideo VP4 | PureVideo HD (VP2) |
| Codecs | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2,MPEG-4 | H.264,VC-1,MPEG-2 |
Power & Dimensions
The GeForce GT 325M draws 50W versus the GeForce 9200's 16W — a 103% difference. The GeForce 9200 is more power-efficient. Recommended PSU: 350W (GeForce GT 325M) vs 350W (GeForce 9200). Power connectors: PCIe-powered vs Legacy.
| Feature | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| TDP | 50W | 16W-68% |
| Recommended PSU | 350W | 350W |
| Power Connector | PCIe-powered | Legacy |
| Length | — | 0mm |
| Height | — | 0mm |
| Slots | 0 | 0 |
| Temp (Load) | — | 70 |
| Perf/Watt | 3.4 | 10.5+209% |
Value Analysis
The GeForce 9200 costs 25% less ($5 savings) at current market prices. Performance per dollar (G3D Mark / price): 8.5 (GeForce GT 325M) vs 11.2 (GeForce 9200) — the GeForce 9200 offers 31.8% better value. The GeForce 9200 is the newer GPU (2016 vs 2013).
| Feature | GeForce GT 325M | GeForce 9200 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | — | $50 |
| Avg Price (30d) | $20 | $15-25% |
| Performance per Dollar | 8.5 | 11.2+32% |
| Codename | GK107 | GM108 |
| Release | June 25 2013 | March 25 2016 |
| Ranking | #726 | #864 |
Top Performing GPUs
The most powerful gpus ranked by G3D Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar GPU comparisons based on GeForce GT 325M and GeForce 9200
